and Gellner never settled on a definition of populism (Taggart. ), which Margaret Canovan’s Populism () comes up with a typology. Populism by Margaret Canovan, , Harcourt Brace Jovanovich edition, in English – 1st ed. Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy. Margaret Canovan Abstract. Populism, understood as an appeal to ‘the people’ against both the.
|Published (Last):||7 October 2005|
|PDF File Size:||18.90 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||4.18 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
In addition, and precisely because it specifies the ontology of populism while it is also populissm about its opposite poles, our minimal definition is particularly well suited for comparing positive populism-laden and negative populism-free cases and also providing credible explanations about populist causality. Comparative Political Studies, vol. Comparing two methods of content analysis.
Conceptual innovation in comparative research.
A second massive wave of interest in the study of populism began developing during the s and s, mostly by Latin American scholars. Unlike the European pioneers, who aimed at definitions, this group of students on populism was primarily concerned with the socio-economic determinants of mass political movements that developed contemporaneously in their respective countries.
Weidenfeld and Nicolson, Thus, our definition is indeed minimal in that it contains only two necessary properties, which, when in tandem, can sufficiently capture the ontology, or nature, of the phenomenon we want analyzed: The problem is that the feasibility, let alone validity, of operationalization is inversely analogous to the number of characteristics inherent in our concept definition.
Government and Opposition, vol. And yet, despite the fact that both modernization and dependency theories of populism had fallen into disrepute, the phenomenon itself anything but disappeared.
On the concept of populism: Here are his exact words: University of Texas Press. European Journal of Political Research, vol. Scientific inference in qualitative research. Studies in South American politics. As shown in the previous sections, the hitherto failure to agree on a common understanding of contemporary populism is related to our mixing up, and studying together, different kinds of populism, which in turn has caused several methodological pitfalls.
At the same time, however, it failed to provide a commonly agreed-upon definition of populism, causing instead significant conceptual stretching and empirical confusion, which still persist. From marginality to mainstream? Populism in Latin America.
Conceptual and Methodological Pitfalls As most seem to agree, for over half a century now we have been engaged in a lively but hitherto futile search for a common understanding in the study of populism.
Populism, persistent Republicanism and declinism: For, during the s and s, a new type of populism flourished in Latin America in a radically different socio-economic and political environment than that of the s and s. Post-authoritarian Greece and post-communist Hungary.
As several scholars were able to ;opulism at the time, many rulers of newly independent nations around the globe had eagerly embraced populism as their chief mode of political action. Those early-day scholars saw populism everywhere, but they hardly reflected on its ontology, nor did they care to distinguish between the many different historical and political contexts within which populism seemed capable of emerging.
University of Pennsylvania Press, As Pauwels admits, such analyses suffer from questionable data reliability, irregular sampling, and coding biases; it is also impossible to measure degrees of populism over time and space.
At the same time, however, our definition is not applicable to predemocratic e. Nor is technocratic elitism inherently inimical to populism.
Populism. By Canovan Margaret. (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981. Pp. 351. $17.95.)
Acta Politica, vol. Populism and the two faces of democracy.
It is worth to always remember that, assigned as we are with the task to construct a mousetrap, it is mice after all that we want to trap and not other small mammals, reptiles, or birds of the field. There have been several gains from this wave of scholarship on populism.
Views Read Edit View history. The nucleus of populism: Eighth, the foregoing minimal definition of populism also points to several of the mechanisms that help it materialize: But who in our contemporary mass democracy is such a vile elitist? How populist are the people?
This, to be sure, is a far from complete list, as further perusal of the literature reveals additional characteristics such as a strong moral element, charismatic leadership, and much more. How can all those phenomena including movements, parties, ideologies, creeds, discourses, strategies, populiwm, styles, and maybe much more that are invariably defined as populist become comparable?
Populism ( edition) | Open Library
To sum up and conclude this article, my initial intent has been to provide a concise overview of how the study of populism has grown—rather extravagantly—during recent decades; to identify the major methodological pitfalls that canoban troubled comparative empirical research; and, finally, to propose a most minimal definition for the further study of populism in the context of contemporary democratic politics. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediatelyespecially if potentially libelous or harmful.
A new theoretical approach to populism. Although its study began in earnest only in the late s, it has since developed through four distinct waves of scholarship, each pertaining to distinct empirical phenomena and with specific methodological and theoretical priorities.